Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - - Part 18

[sueb1863]

PJ gave the dwarves some neat character backstories but never did anything with them. He could have done something just by putting a line or two here and there, but in the end only about five of them ended up making any impression, which is a shame because the actors were enthusiastic and talented.

Remember when John Rhys-Davies told them they'd be chased by women all over the world? This was when they just started filming. Of course he was wrong because nobody knew at the time that PJ was going to shaft most of them on screen time and character development, and now that the movies are over most people don't even know their characters' names, let alone the actors. I'm sure all of them can still walk down the street completely unnoticed, with the exceptions of the actors who were well known before the movies.

 

[regwec]

I know I'm going to get a lot of crap for this, but in the Lord of The Rings books there wasn't a lot of time spent on story, for hundreds of pages we got scenery. There was no love story in the books, the epic battles were a paragraph, like The Battle of Pelanor Fields. Easily all three LOTR's books could easily have been cut down to one or two books. Legolas and Gimli hardly had anything to say, Saruman was only mentioned throughout the story; we didn't see him till the end. Seriously the books were so light on actually telling a story.

I think this line of criticism misses the point of the story as it is told.

The over-arching theme is of loss, which is tied to a metaphor of changing seasons. This is evidenced as well as anything by the fact that Frodo's journey lasts precisely one year, and that Gandalf is reincarnated in the spring. The descriptions of scenery, trees, flora and fauna are all subsidiary elements to Tolkien's broader literary expression, necessary to illustrate the passage of time and the seasons.

As for the story being too "light"- one of the most frequent criticisms of LOTR (and Tolkien's books in general) is that there is "too much story"! I think that perhaps the style of telling the story from the perspective of a few participants, with much of its context kept off the page, didn't work for you. That is fair enough, but for me the sense that there is a wider world through which the hobbits will never journey, and that events are shaped by characters and events we never see, adds to the depth and richness of the story. I think that it was a masterstroke to keep Sauron as a distant menace, and to introduce us to Saruman only after he had been humbled.

 

[CGHulk]

I think this line of criticism misses the point of the story as it is told.

The over-arching theme is of loss, which is tied to a metaphor of changing seasons. This is evidenced as well as anything by the fact that Frodo's journey lasts precisely one year, and that Gandalf is reincarnated in the spring. The descriptions of scenery, trees, flora and fauna are all subsidiary elements to Tolkien's broader literary expression, necessary to illustrate the passage of time and the seasons.

As for the story being too "light"- one of the most frequent criticisms of LOTR (and Tolkien's books in general) is that there is "too much story"! I think that perhaps the style of telling the story from the perspective of a few participants, with much of its context kept off the page, didn't work for you. That is fair enough, but for me the sense that there is a wider world through which the hobbits will never journey, and that events are shaped by characters and events we never see, adds to the depth and richness of the story. I think that it was a masterstroke to keep Sauron as a distant menace, and to introduce us to Saruman only after he had been humbled.

My critique is about if the movie had the same pacing that is in the book, respectfully the movie would have to have two or more hours of narrated scenery to be faithful and that would suck and the lack of character development would too. Regardless of what Tolkein wrote, a film at the pacing and lack of character development of the books would bore the heck out of the general audience.

 

[regwec]

I think it is fairly obvious that scenery would not be narrated in a visual medium.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

respectfully the movie would have to have two or more hours of narrated scenery to be faithful

LOTR by Terrence Mallick. Book it.

 

[CGHulk]

I think it is fairly obvious that scenery would not be narrated in a visual medium.

I guess I needed to of been clearer in my initial post,; story wise my criticism of the book of its 200 pages or more of descriptive scenery would not have translated well to film.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I think it is fairly obvious that scenery would not be narrated in a visual medium.

Yep. And I'll take dozens of pages of well-composed scenery description over hours of fake looking CGI cinematic bloat and green-screen surroundings anyday.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I also find it funny that people think one of the most popular and successful fantasy works of all time is or would be "boring" to a general audience. Um... how'd it get to be popular and successful then?

Kids these days... such short attention spans.

 

[CGHulk]

That's a problem today. Look at how overly written and over the top action that was in the last Avengers film. Even a teenager I know complained about it. All the while the general audience loved it.

the Lord of the Rings movies were almost completely re-written to make the characters more interesting, and back when it came out in theaters I heard people complaining how those film were boring. Imagine if the films were faithful adaptations? They would of bored the audience to death!

 

[ThePhantasm]

Yeah, but its a problem with the reader, not the literature.

 

[regwec]

I think, in a sense, LOTR (the book) has long been a victim of its own success. It was such an unusual and such a popular book in the 60s-70s that it spawned its own derivative genre, which has in turn shaped expectations of what specimens of that genre should contain. Occasionally, fans of the imitations find the imitated to be distant and austere.

This hasn't been helped by PJ's movies, which misrepresent the books as moronic, brash and uncouth.

 

[CGHulk]

We are too entertained today. My 72 year old father told me the books were really exciting and not considered slow moving back when they first came out. He also told me when Star Wars came out in 1977 it wasn't considered slow paced, but in my generation people complained how boring that first film was. I've heard kids today complaining that it's their least favorite film because it's so boring.

Regwec, I too believe that the movies have hurt the the books, that people who saw the movies expect the books to be like the movies, not having the expectation the other way around.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I don't think Star Wars is slow paced at all... ??

These kids need to cut down on the sugar in their diet.

 

[regwec]

Really? I fear for the future.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

He also told me when Star Wars came out it wasn't considered slow paced

Star Wars? Slow paced? Christ almighty.

Star Wars moves about as briskly as any non-Michael Bay films today.

 

[Boom]

Anyone watch the Honest Trailer for the third film?

 

[regwec]

Link us up, Comrade.

 

[CGHulk]

Here you go.
[YT]watch?v=r4xxym2tyEM[/YT]

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I never had any problem with Legolas running over tumbling bricks. It's an over the top cinematic interpretation of Leolas' nimble athleticism from the books.

 

[CGHulk]

My only real complaint is the CG elves being front and center.

 

[Lord]

Anyone thinks we'll get some sort of Middle-Earth pack with all the films?

 

[CGHulk]

Anyone thinks we'll get some sort of Middle-Earth pack with all the films?

Jackson said all three Hobbit films in their extended cuts will be in a box set titled 'There and Back Again'.

 

[Lord]

Well, there's already a pack for all three Hobbit films, though it doesn't have the extended cuts because Battle of the five armies's hasn't been released yet. What i'm wondering is if we'll see a back that includes both trilogies, a sort of Middle Earth film series collection.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I re-watched DOS today (I dunno why): it was excruciating.

 

[Boom]

I turn the movie off after the end of Bilbo and Smaug's conversation.